I think some of that depends upon how VSL a person is, no, Dottie?

Ok I can see how a standard achievement test would favor the verbal kids and that VSL kids might be at a disadvantage. For the same reason highly verbal kids can do more poorly on non-verbal tests such as CoGAT and Naglieri, I've read.

Sure Kriston...your post wasn't there when I made mine, LOL! I think of DD11 as pretty VSL, but she wants to do well in school, and tries her best to compensate and make the best of a more auditory setting. Our district is playing around with those learning styles too, and elementary at least has a strong visual component.

She does make...interesting....errors on your basic tests. For the 1st or 2nd grade SAT-10, she only had one score that qualified her to try the SCAT through JHU (score greater than 95th)...yet she cleared their bar with room to spare for programs in one area, and just missed in the other.

She "gets" a lot....but probably has a different way of applying her insight.

(Disclaimer: I don't claim to understand this child!)

Oh, and happy 5th to Dazey's little guy! (5 seems so young!)

I think it's interesting that on Snowgirl's link that "is academically talented" is contrasted with "is creatively, technologically, mechanically, emotionally or spiritually gifted".

Surely many kids have strengths on both sides, but DD11 is clearly the latter! She does well in school, don't get me wrong, but the other side is overwhelmingly her. I ran the checklist on her again last night, and she hits almost all of the ride side markers, and the other ones are just not really clear. She has very little on the left.

Don't you love those crossposts, Dottie?!

Your post reminds me of a piece of wisdom that I think you gave me months ago, back when I was trying to figure out whether DS6 was VSL or not. This wise woman (whom I will assume was you--it was either you or Grinity, I know) said that a child who shows many of the signs of being VSL, but who does lots of things well may just be REALLY smart!

I remember it well because it was actually one of the posts that helped lead me out of my GT denial.

So if a child is good at puzzles and mazes and all things VSL, but he's also an early reader who has a vocabulary bigger than some college students, he might not be VSL so much as he is HG+ and able to learn easily just about any which way.

Food for thought...

Hey,
I’ve been following along here and have picked up my copy of the book to determine if I could part with it for $75. I decided no.

A chapter that I reviewed emphasized that VSL do better on more complex tests than the easier ones. I think this is true in my daughter’s case. She did much better on the Explore test she took this March than she did on the ITBS last fall. The part that really stood out on the ITBS was her low score for ending punctuation and capitalization. She doesn’t have a problem with these areas IRL, but for some reason got most wrong on the easy ITBS. However, she landed at the 98th percentile for English on the Explore test.

Their school used to give the Terra-Nova which I believe has more above level questions than the ITBS.



That child might be both VSL and HG+. My daughter was also an early reader and had very high Verbal scores early on.

True. Good catch. I didn't mean to exclude that possibility.

I don't remember saying "really smart", , but I probably described that DS9 IS VSL, but also very strong auditorially too, and the combo often makes for HG+!

DS13 is also strong both, but not overwhelmingly so. She's probably more VSL than auditory, but nicely balanced, and solidly MG all said and done.

The good news for those of you unsure of these things, is that the pieces do fall into place with time!

All right, let me see if I can get this out right without actually referring to the book (that would be much too sensible). (and yes, preggo brain is still in full force. I can't finish the harder sudoku puzzles anymore - pathetic! and frustrating.) I think Silverman says something to the effect that kids with high IQ scores are likely to have VSL strengths, with or without the left-brain weaknesses - simply by the nature of the tests.

Ok, let's see what I can find in the book... Here's one section, not the one I was looking for: "Visual-spatial ability is another way of being smart; it is just less often recognized than the left-hemispheric, sequential skills that lead to academic success. individuals who demonstrate exceptional visual-spatial strengths, imaginistic thinking, complexity of thought, humor, empathy, musical talent, artistic expression, or creative imagination, are indeed gifted. They may not always score in the highest ranges on IQ tests, because these measures are geared more for sequential learners. Most IQ tests emphasize verbal abilities, with few items taht assess visual-spatial abilities. And these items are usually timed, so the examinee has to be fast as well as adept. The strengths of the visual-spatial learner are harder to asses (How do you measure if someone has superior visual imagery??), but these individuals are still gifted. As the very least, they should be assessed on untimed nonverbal tests in addition to verbal tests." Upside Down Brilliance, p. 50.

It sounds to me that there she was talking primarily about VSLs who may have left-brain weaknesses. I was looking for a different passage - let's see...

"Basically, I've come across two distinct groups of gifted VSLs: high spatial, high sequential and high spatial, low sequential. The exceptionally gifted have highly developed visual-spatial and auditory sequential abilities. It is interesting to note that they tend to be ambidextrous as well (indicating strong development of both hemispheres). The children who are brighter than they appear at school often have highly developed visual-spatial abilities, but poor auditory-sequential abilities.
...
"Exceptionally gifted VSLs can learn by auditory-sequential metnhods, but learning that way often feels boring. They prefer to learn all at once, in great intuitive leaps, where they see the pattern, and everything fits together for them into a coherent whole.
...
"They lead with the spatial system, and if they can't get the concept that way, they will resort secondarily to more tedious, sequential p;rocesses. Learning in a step-by-step fashion seems painfully slow in comparison to grasping an entire idea all at once - seeing it and understanding it completely in a lightening flash...
...
"It makes more sense to give these students difficultg enough material so that they, too, have to struggle to learn...'No student should be deprived of the right to struggle.'
...
"Dee Lovecky's warning about what happens when exceptionally gifted children are 'forced at too young an age into others' molds' needs to be heeded. I have counseled many exceptoinally gifted VSLs who turned off their innate way of knowing in order to fit in better with the mainstream. Some lost all interest in learning, underachieved, and eventually dropped out of school. Some forfeited their strong suit and became rigid auditory-sequential learners, allowing their visual-spatial abilities to atrophy...
...
"The other type of visual-spatial learner, hihg in spatial abilities and low in sequential abilities, poses an even greater challenge to educators. Reading, writing, spelling and calculating - the basic curriculum of elementary school - may be difficult for them to master. Children who struggle with the '3 R's' are not perceived as very bright and often feel dumb. It helps them to know that VSLs usually get smarter as they get older, and that their time will come." Upside Down Brilliance, pp. 63-65.

That still wasn't the passage I was looking for - oh well... (on the upside, my doc appt yesterday indicates preggo brain may be ending sooner than I thought; if only to be replaced by sleep deprivation brain)